Thanks for watching all! We're honoured that Adam Riess who we mentioned in the video reached out today and I wanted to pass along what he wrote. Riess wanted to highlight that his team were careful to account for dust, noteably by working in near-infrared wavelengths, and believe their systematic error to be much smaller than the Hubble tension, as discussed in this paper arxiv.org/abs/2112.04510. For metallicity, they select 1st and 2nd distance ladder rung objects with similar metallicites to reduce its influence, and thus again believe this isn't the issue. So the tension is certainly not easy to understand in terms of systematics either. Thanks to Adam for reaching out and I hope his comments help shed some further light here. Ultimately, as I said in the video, we are all hoping to see multiple independent methods and analyses weigh in with refined upcoming data, either towards a genuine tension, or a convergence to a singular Hubble constant. What's exciting is that we should get clearer answers in the next year or so, but until let's all keep an open mind, even if like me we're secretly hoping for new physics ;-)
Ancient Greek crystal sphere model could correctly predict planetary motions and even eclipses. While a minority of ancient Greek thinkers correctly argued the earth rotated under the sun and that the stars were actually other distant suns their theory was not widely accepted. Part of the problem is they lacked the technology to validate these claims. if we move forward in time to Galileo and Copernicus, the Heliocentric model was accepted but their concept of univserse was still limited by the power of their early telescopes. By the late 19th century the miliky way galaxy was still widely considered the universe. Then comes Hubble and not only discovered other galaxies but discovered red shift that suggusted an expanding universe. Once again our conceptualisation of what constitutes the universe changed. There is a pattern here. Our sense of our universe and its history is tightly coupled to the distance our technology can peer into it. Observation is critical to the scientific method. One can make assertions about specific aspects of the universe but there is a philosophical problem trying to use finite observations to make overly assertive claims about the entire universe. It may still turn out the universe is infinite in space and time. This is speculation of course but I'm no longer a fan of the big bang theory. I could be wrong but I lean towards it never happened or there is something off with the theory to make it seem that was the moment of creation rather than just a moment in time in infinite time.. What made me first start questioning it was the discovery of dark energy and dark matter. The lack of adjusting the age of the universe downward (the age actually became older since then) suggested the formulas were wrong but because few are qualified to look at the complicated physics the immediate irregularity was brushed aside. There are other irregularities like the rather arbitrary tacking on of inflation. While inflation can make the math work no one really has an answer for what it actually allegedly is. 13.8 billion years old sounds like a lot of time but to randomly come up with the conditions for life along with randomly arriving at intelligent life in that timeframe seems highly unlikely. Even just considering the nature of numbers its seems absurdly low number. Why isn't it the year 13.8 trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion trillion? And so on. It's not proof of course but from a statistics standpoint it seems very implausible humans showed up this early. For all we know dark energy flips in a 100 billion years and we end up with an oscillating universe that avoids both big bang and the big rip. Here is my prediction based on admittedly empirically flimsy a priori arguments. Either JWT or some next gen telescope that replaces it will find galaxies that are much older than predicted by Big Bang theory. The future wil mimick the past. As our ability to peer into the universe improves we will be forced to once again change our understanding of its size and age. I don't claim this as a fact (could be wrong) and I don't have the math to prove it, It's just a gut guess but my bet is the steady state universe model will one day make a comeback but one that incorporates redshift, dark energy, dark matter,, gravity, CBT, QM and possibly other phenomena.
I am sure we have new physics coming up after QM and GR have been with us for a century now. We have the unexplained dark matter and dark energy something that could occupy cosmology for another hundred years. We are waiting for another Einstein to be born. Imagine if Einstein is born a hundred years later, we would NOT be able to correctly understand the nature of time for a century and still be using Lorentz transformation with funky material science explanation that keeps Newtonian time in place.
@@peterwan9076 Absolutely Peter,dark matter and dark energy are the new realms which science has to address with great precision and depth.Even artificial intelligence world is awaiting great innovation.Lovely to read your comment.
As a barely average student in science and a slightly below average student in math, I am cursed with a love and fascination of cosmology and physics. It's sources like this channel that give me a hope of even the slightest understanding of it all and keeps me coming back for more.
Despite having no scientific background and often not understanding every explanation, I love this channel. It heightens my sense of wonder about our universe. Looking forwards to the next video.
You have to watch many of the videos more than once to understand. This stuff is all cutting edge and counterintuitive. Physics & astronomy is the hardest stuff in the world. It's all outside our daily experience as humans. Our brains aren't even designed or configured to understand it. It's remarkable that any humans have made such progress in science. It's a total accident that evolution required our brains to develop to such a degree for survival purposes, that an understanding of physics and astronomy became an accidental byproduct. And this understanding was only because civilization and agriculture recently enabled many of us to think all day, instead of hunting and surviving all day, as was the case for 100 thousand years
I'm 60 and was born in the middle of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Astronomy is now in a Golden Age, and I couldn't be happier. When I was a kid, the Apollo Moonshot was the world-changing paradigm, then we had Skylab, followed by ISS and the Shuttle SLS. Now, we got all these scopes out there plus tons of satellites, and various probes to other worlds . . . Golden Age! 🧠👀
Shuttle then ISS. Im 65 and I get your point. I remember laying on our trampoline and staring at the moon during all Apollo missions. At 10 yrs old I couldn’t understand why I couldn’t see them, even when dad bought us a telescope from Sears. For those who don’t know, Sears was the Amazon of our day.
Props to the editor for putting together these high-quality videos so frequently. Most people watch these videos for Mr Kipping's great explanations on these complex topics (and it can't be understated how great he does) but it wouldn't be the same without all the visuals.
@@CoolWorldsLab Zooper Dooper 108? If you want. Raven 16:02 two orange flavoured 107th gotta eat them with a gin now, lol. Do I have to look at the page I paused on in the 100 s2e1?
I wish you were my high-school teacher...I don't think I would have dropped out if you were. Your compassion for teaching science excites my childhood curiosity, and I just want to thank you.
What an eloquently spoken commentary on issues in cosmology. I've been noticing a lot of sensationalized videos on TH-cam and it's good to have these more humble approaches to the topics. This is real science and unfortunately there's not many channels that portray these elements in this kind of way.
Yeah people need to be more humble & stop saying they know what gravity is when in fact they have no explanation for why spacetime is curved near mass & energy.
I love real science. The science we have now will tell us the universe is flat without the caveat that if the universe were 400x the size we estimate, it wouldn't need to be flat.
Dr. Kipping, some of us clicked on the video precisely because we knew that you would bring evidence, thoughtfulness, and nuance to the question. 😊 I always appreciate your videos and, more importantly, your commitment to science.
I saw this notification at work and got a text from my son about 5 minutes later. We're about to sit down and watch after supper and I can't thank you enough for you and your team giving him such a rush for learning.
One small correction: I didn't click on the video because of the title; I clicked on the video because it's a Cool Worlds video and those are >always< fascinating and informative, regardless of the topic/content. Thanks for this channel and all you bring!
I cannot express how grateful I am that you're going into such detail on these subjects. There's an awful lot of videos out there that barely scratch the surface and leave it at that. Too many in fact.
@@PazLeBon The "answer" is it's already been found a while ago, only the "cure" can NEVER be officially revealed and given to the public because the "Pharmaceutical Industry" would lose billions in profit from "treating" it.
I'm not Cosmologist/Astrophysicist but I think the problem here is that we're approaching our understanding of the size/age of the universe from a bias vector. Humans are finite. We're born, we live, we age, we die. So are stars, planets, nebula, heck, even mountains and rocks have an age limit. Thus I think when we started exploring cosmology with hard science we did so under an unconscious assumption that the Universe is also finite. That's where I think it all went wrong. Every "crisis of cosmology" that arises, and this isn't the first, all tends to point in the same direction: The universe is infinitely vast and infinitely old. It was never "created", will never end and has no size limit and the "big bang" was nothing more than a "local event" that occurred within a universe that already existed vs. creating the universe we're in.
This channel is brilliant. Your narration is amazing.... And to me, You are the David Attenborough of TH-cam. I always look forward to your new videos 🤘🏽
I feel so smart as I follow Dr. Kipping through the various topics. Thank you Dr. Kipping for all of the patient and thoughtful detail in your presentation.
His presentation is hypnotic and I like the fact that he is the exact opposite of a sensationalist. Imagine being able to make statistics a fascinating subject. What a gift to the world.
John von Neumann famously noted that with 4 parameters he could fit an elephant and with 5 he could waggle its trunk. The 6 parameters to model CMB is therefore hardly compelling especially when two of these, dark matter and dark energy, are Faerie Dust that can be assigned any distribution that astronomers desire, that can never be challenged because the gnomes will never be found in the particle garden.
The idea that there is a path dependency around which hypotheses are accepted/rejected is really fascinating to think about. And the implication that Cepheids aren’t actually very good standard candles, they’re just the first ones we figured out how to use, means we’ll have to re-write the astronomy textbooks.
That's another way of saying confirmation bias, which is a HUGE issue in cosmology, were only even asking these questions because of a 'tension', if erroneous methods give us the expected result they don't get questioned, worse we then build new expectations on thouse faulty conclusions which go on to influence the next observations.
@@kennethferland5579 Agreed - especially on a basis of high variability within a base measurement standard. Reasons being due to environment local compositions, color shift, or distortions along with the object being measured having possible variation in it's frequency or possible brightness itself. Could absolutely see how confirmation bias appearing since data tracks on a perceived line or pattern. High variability should always be a red flag & propose further data to ensure viability of the standard itself.
Well I mean that’s how the state of gravity is now. In relativity the classic ball and paper explanation works but at the quantum level it doesn’t which means gravitational forces are something deeper or we got something wrong with relativity but it’s close enough to still make that model work. The amazing thing in science is we’re always so focused on pushing forward that we often forget to recheck our work over time to make sure it still holds up to current models.
I think part of the issue is definitely our use of standard candles as our main method of measuring the universe. Good carpenters use the same measuring tape for an entire project because there may be a discrepancy between measuring tapes. What I mean is we need a fixed, zero-variable method of calculating distance in the cosmos. Until we can do that, we will continue to be the baby trying to fit a cube into a circular hole. It was a useful method for its time, but relying on individual interstellar objects for gathering so many important data is a big mistake. Constructing buildings out of brick and mortar used to be state-of-the-art and was incredibly useful for its time, but we don't build skyscrapers out of it. We came up with better methods.
I really love your channel but it’s a double edge sword watching your content. You present things in such a great and enjoyable way makes it hard for me to enjoy other space related channels.
i have a b.s. in astronomy and it's always nice to find a channel that balances the technical and mathematical side of astronomy with the cool and exciting side that invokes curiosity in all of us
David, your videos are remarkable. Your narrative inspires me to listen carefully, keeping a google window open to search up unfamiliar terms. It feels as though you are teaching a master course in astronomy. Encourages me to expand my understanding in this area. Brilliant!
I love watching these TH-cam videos, on the cosmos. Most exceptionally well done. In this particular instance. Our lovely host. Has some wonderful and expert, equalization and dynamic range processing. That makes his voice and his delivery. So wonderfully listenable. Above and beyond that of, even many other well produced, professional productions. I'm an actual, successful, audio engineer and broadcast engineer. Who has made history. In the process of garnering, 4 major music awards nominations. For my audio engineering knowledge and expertise. And so I know from whence I speak. This audio is, to put it simply. Superb. And so wonderfully easy to listen to. So smooth and soothing. No rough edges. No harsh sounds. This person knows what they are doing. At the highest levels. I rarely leave comments like this. For the other professionally produced videos. As their soundtracks are fine. While nothing also makes me sit up and take note. My ears and my hearing are, attune, to great audio. And the soundtrack just made me, perk right up. And go wow. This guy sounds great! And a rare complement for me. But I call it like I hear it. And well this just sounds fucking great! This is a breath of fresh air. In a vacuum. RemyRAD
Thank you for taking a minute to try and reinforce critical thinking and rational thought at the end of your video. The US needs it more than ever. Keep up the great work I love your videos even if some of them go over my head!
@@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192 subjectively isn’t really always wrong, it just by definition doesn’t have a right or wrong answer outside of the individual observer. Which I guess is sort of what you’re getting at, but I wouldn’t call it “wrong”
In the text preamble above just below video title, should the section "...should be believe the sensationalism?" be replaced with "...should [we] believe the sensationalism?" Awesome presentation indeed!
This was the most understandable explanation of the distance ladder I've ever encountered. It's like everything clicked for me finally. Kudos for presenting it in a way that non-astronomers can understand the evolving processes and their refinement. It's amazing we got as much knowledge from Cepheids as we did, and it's exciting to have a new, more reliable standard candle going forward. Absolutely astounding work. Next, I'm hoping someone can bring some new insight into the "Axis of Evil," as it's one of my favorite mysteries. Is it a coincidence? Is it evidence of the observer phenomenon and retro causality as human eyes scan the skies from Earth? Can't wait to learn more.
Same! A simple rubber band with marks drawn on it with a sharpie. This did more for my understanding than any visualization yet. And the description and visualization of parallax as well! Thank you thank you thank you! 🫡✌🏼✨
There is a major problem with our view of the CMB. Observations have shown that the "shape" of the CMB matches the shape of "the trees in our backyard", ie the dust and gas clouds within our galaxy. In other words, imagine a first artist trying to determine the shape of clouds in the sky, and he makes a sketch ("Sketch 1") of them, but failed to take into account of the trees, their branches and their leaves between us and the clouds. The conclusion is that the clouds look like Sketch 1. Now imagine a second artist taking a sketch of the trees, their branches and the leaves ("Sketch 2"). When compared, it turns out that Sketch 2 looks very much like Sketch 1 especially when viewed from the same vantage point. In other words, the wrong conclusions are made about the CMB.
I love how your videos only speak in terms of numbers and science, not the typical fallacious argument for different hot buttons about cosmology and science, i feel like i can actually reference your videos and papers bc they are truly researched and vetted for validation
My goodness, this guy explains it in a way that a totally d.u.m.b person regarding that matter like myself can actually understand it clearly. No BS, just clear and precise explanation, with such usefull illustrations. Thank you so much!
I know I'm not dumb ,but where I get a bit lost are when certain scientific term are quoted that I have no idea what it means but I do get a little of what the overall talk is about
You’re the fucking best dude thank you for putting out the best videos that are always firmly based on the principles of science and healthy skepticism. I love how you refuse to speculate without explicitly stating that you’re speculating and are okay with being unsure or agnostic about the answers to these grand questions
@@mikehopkins4040 idk bc swearing is fucking lit dude. Really helps to drive home points of emphasis, especially when we only have text on screens to communicate with. And this channel deserves to be told emphatically how fucking good it is
I didn't click on the video because of the "Crisis in Cosmology" text - but because I searched for "David Kipping" after your lecture "Why we might be alone"
Thanks to you and the entire team, I’m in love with this channel. Although my profession has nothing to do with cosmology, I’ve always been fascinated with it and understanding what’s around us, and having this channel with its clear and digestible information in my arsenal of channels is amazing. Here’s to hoping for many more progresses in the years to come 🎉🎉
I really love this man's voice. Especially he never treats us as tho we can't understand what he's saying. More than this the increasing accuracy of the levied law, I love that the woman working on the Hubble constant is working on the solution. And making progress. This video is amazing. Iove the practical solution that falls short of a crisis. And how evidence supports it. I guess Pick 2 of 3.
Dr. Kipling I wanted to take the time to tell you how much I love your videos and respect your insightful analysis. You and Sabine are my favorite science TH-cam channels precisely because of your relaxed, non inflammatory insights.
That's not so bad. Just a boffin-squabble over very small numbers: the Universe may be slightly bigger or smaller than we thought it was. That stuff about dust and Cephids was news to me though, and the new measurements using big old stars sound very promising. Thanks for clearing this up for us, Professor. 🤓
You definitely gave me the answer I want to hear. A sober and straightforward analysis is what to me seems like the most appropriate and valuable approach, so thank you for that.
I had seen a few TH-cam thumbnails on this topic, but didn't trust that they wouldn't be cluckbaity. When I saw you covering this topic I knew I would get a well considered, well thought out analysis. Keep up the great work!
I was hoping this title was addressing another crisis in cosmology which was addressed but not resolved in the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics. I was however excited by how clearly you addressed this crisis in the cosmological ladder crisis and it's possible solution.
Perhaps “enhance one’s existing humanist thoughts” would have been better. Cosmology is a tenant of humanist philosophy but being a cosmologist does not automatically make you a humanist. Great comment my friend.
Dr. Brian May, a famous astrophysicist, wrote his PhD thesis on the very subject of dust and how it interferes with our observations of the universe. Realizing that the subject might be too difficult for most people to comprehend, he co-wrote a more generalized publication that predicted the eventual demise of the Cepheid Constant... "Another One Bites the Dust." Yes. THAT Brian May.
I can only speak for myself but I don't click on coolworlds because of thumbnails. I click on coolworlds because I love science and space. Dr Kipping you're an amazing scientist and great at explaining to those of us who are not astrophysicist's. Thank you for sharing your universe with us! 🙏🏻
i swear David .. you are so darn good at taking complicated subjects and explaining them in a way that is so easy to understand. I love what your doing man. Thanks you soooooo much !
As always we can rely on Cool Worlds to put aside the hyperbole and click bait chasing trends of our current era, to enlighten us in a non sensationalist, and as a result, a far more interesting search to discover the true nature of the universe around us! Thank you
The only thing that makes me really sad because of me dying someday, is that I will not be able to learn about all new discoveries in cosmology, physics. I wonder what our view on the world, Universe will be in hundred years. I'm not a scientist like you, professor, but astronomy, cosmology always captivated me and you are doing FANTASTIC job in making me (and millions of people around the world) to be able to learn new things. Thank you so much.
@@encyclopath probably! But that is entirely different field going to philosophy. I believe that there is eventually some sort of barrier beyond which we will not be able to understand things. For me it is why current collection of atoms and molecules that form my body is able to recognize it and think about it. I think this ultimate question is unanswereable.
RED SHIFT: (copy and paste from my files): Red Shift: Consider the following: a. Current narrative: Space itself is expanding. (Even though science does not fully know yet what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually expand). b. But consider: The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, (even modern science claims 'em' has momentum), continuously, over a prolonged period of time, with other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies away from each other and even potentially allow the cosmic web to form between galaxies. And then, when we here in our galaxy, look at far away galaxies, with other galaxies in between, the net effect of all those galactic interactions would have galaxies furthest from ours move away faster the further those galaxies were from us, including us perceiving a red shift of energy. c. Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? What the current narrative is ('a' above), or 'b' utilizing known physics? * Added note: Plus, 'if' my analysis is correct that our spiral shaped galaxy is collapsing in upon itself, then consider also: d. When we look at solar systems between ours and the center of the galaxy, those solar systems would be getting pulled faster towards the center than ours, hence also seeing a red shift of energy. e. When we look at solar systems between ours and the outer edge of the galaxy, our solar system would be getting pulled faster towards the center then them, hence also seeing a red shift of energy. f. Only if we looked at solar systems adjacent to ours should we see a blue shift of energy (as the solar systems became closer together as they moved towards the center of the galaxy). I also propose looking for blue shifts of energy between our solar system and adjacent solar systems to confirm or deny this current belief. g. But if true, would also add to our observation of seeing a red shift of energy in this universe as our spiral shaped galaxy collapses in upon itself. Of which, not only would species from this Earth have to get off of this Earth before the Sun becomes a red giant one day and wipes out all life on this Earth if not even the entire Earth itself, but species from this Earth would also have to successfully get out of this collapsing spiral shaped galaxy, otherwise, most probably death awaits us all and this Earth and all on it are all just a waste of space time in this universe. All life from this Earth would eventually die and go extinct. Currently, no exceptions. h. QUESTION: Do basically all galaxies eventually collapse in upon themselves? (Which would add to the perceived red shift between galaxies as they all basically shrink in size). Modern science currently states that 'gravity' is matter bending the fabric of spacetime. There is a lot of matter in a galaxy and hence would make a huge dent in spacetime. How could galaxies not collapse in upon themselves if space and time were bent to make it so? Of which also, the progression of galaxies?: 1. How exactly do galaxies form? (The current narrative is that matter, via gravity, attracts other matter. The electric universe model also includes universal plasma currents.) 2. How exactly do galaxies flatten out if gravity is acting on the whole galaxy? (Other forces must also be at work besides gravity for a galaxy to flatten out? Electrical and/or magnetic forces?) 3. How exactly do galaxies become spiral shaped? (At least one way would be orbital velocity of matter with at least gravity acting upon that matter, would cause a spiral shaped effect. The electric universe model also includes energy input into the galaxy, which spiral towards the galactic center, which then gets thrust out from the center, at about 90 degrees from the input. Additionally, with the conservation of energy, as energy moves into the vertical plane from the center of the horizontal plane, energy from the horisontal plane moves to the center of the horizontal plane to replace the energy that moved into the vertical plane. There is also the conservation of angular momentum. As more matter moves towards the center of the galaxy, that portion of the galaxy would speed up relative to the matter towards the outer portions of the galaxy.) 4. The natural progression of a galaxy would be to become smaller and smaller. 5. Of which, does all life throughout the entire universe (if other life even exists in the universe besides what is on this Earth, which is most probably true) eventually die and go extinct and the entire universe and all in it are ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and the entire universe and all in it are ultimately just a waste of spacetime in existence? And even 'if' the current narrative of space itself is expanding, and the entire universe would eventually end in a 'big freeze', wouldn't the end of life itself in this entire universe still occur?
It's so disappointing that James Webb didn't shoot the death rays at Proxima B's civilisation. I was hoping for some galactic war action. Jokes aside, it's honestly amazing new discoveries and breakthroughs like this are letting us understand our universe better, thanks for explaining this in simple terms for us common folk.
Very good video as I've come to expect. I'd rather have sober reasonable analysis that admits there's more to learn than some clickbaity nonsense that doesn't even attempt to explain what is known so far.
The idea of the universe having a begining is a human contruct. It's like teaching a dog mathematics. It can't be done in time scales we think in.. The human brain is just wired to think of things through the lens of a begining and end.. There is no begining or end. The universe has always been here. Evolving on a globe means if you walk in one direction you always end up where you started (sortof) but you get the point it's built into our consciousness to think of things in a certain way..
Just a word to your closing comments: I am fine with catchy and somewhat "clickbait" titles. As long as I get hard sience as content. In the vast sea of stuff on youtube alone, you have to make some bold statements to catch the eye of the person looking at his/her youtube recommendation list. By the way: this is how I got to your channel yesterday. But looking at your *content* made me a subscriber. And that never happens on titles alone. And while we are at it: Thanks for the incredible content.
No. I clicked the video because I am a subscriber, and wanted to hear what you had to say. I have nothing to really say on the crisis itself, as it doesn't interest me on any personal level. I just hear what people say, then I let it sort itself out in the deeper recesses of my mind while I continue to seek more knowledge to compile. A never ending cycle. My conclusion thus far.. the universe is weird.
This is easily one of my favorite channels on astronomy and associated topics on TH-cam and beyond! The subject matter is presented incredibly well by an actual person who knows what they are talking about! Even though some of the information can be overwhelmingly complex to understand, it is explained in a way that anyone can understand and appreciate! Thanks for your extraordinary work and dedication to sharing your knowledge and insights with the world, therefore making the human race more intellectually evolved!
Professor, as always, your content is informing, clear, non-sensational, and accessible for your average person - how lucky are we to have such regular access to great scientists as yourself instead of clickbait nonsense.
I find your comment, “…one that has inspired transformations from nihilism to humanism,” omitting theism, to be shallow and biased; Given that the study of cosmology has either contributed to, or directly led to the conversion of many people from humanism to theism. ‘Cosmological wonder’ has guided many intelligent people from the study of natural science, through philosophy to Theology. And this is not to mention the fact that many of the greatest discoveries in the history of cosmology were made by Catholic scientist-monks or otherwise deeply religious people. I hope I am mistaken, but that comment stuck out to me as an indicator of ideological bias based on contemporary trends within the scientific community.
Predispositions don't count... But the exaggeration approach - and honesty does (thanks for your honesty because I really liked clicking on this video)!
Personally, I think this is one of the very best channels on You tube, and I agree with Sabine Hossenfelder, I prefer my You tube subs to be PhD's or experts in the field they are talking about. Sorry to appear to be snob but I am easily satisfied by the best of everything and I count Cool Worlds as one of those things. Warm Regards.
Wow, what an awesome video. So much great stuff in it, it's a bit hard to process all that info and perspective but that's why it's worth a few times watching. Thank you so much.
I found this video very clearly explaining the so called "crisis in cosmology". As I'm not a native English speaker, I also follow the automatically generated English text while listening. The mistakes are sometimes hilarious. Cepheids denoted as "selfies", ".. well inside the galaxy" becomes "warm inside the galaxy". Thanks for the nice explanation though!
I found out that there is one simple reason why it cant be “created” by using quantum math: -The magnitude of the Universe is zero. It does not exists. It never existed before, it does not exist now and it wont going to exist ever. So, it is not possible to create there cause nothing is never created. -The magnitude of the Universe is infinite. It existence is absolute. It exists since forever, it allways existed and always will. So, it is not possible to create there cause everything is allready created. If you notice more than one statement there, they are equal in value like etc: 1 + 1 = 2. The reason why 1 + 1 equals 2 is the same reason why it cant be created.
Dr Kipping, of all the people I can think of that I would love to sit down with by a fire on a winters night with a good bottle of wine and time to talk ( or an afternoon in a British country pub) its you. A fan since your channel started, 62 yo retired combat pilot. Thank you for the message you deliver.
Sober, well explained without sensationalism, detailed and enjoyable to listen to - even for a novice like myself. Cannot thank you enough for explaining this term and why I have heard it repeated constantly. Beyond happy that I clicked on this. Thank you.
The current model of what our universe looks like, that cylinder shape, makes absolutely no sense to me. I feel like it is a mistake to assume our universe is expanding in only one direction. And it puzzles me to no end how anyone could look at that and say "Yep, that makes sense." And the very bottom of it is the worst of it. Are you telling me that, in the beginning, the matter of the universe as it is forming, curved outward from the origin, and then decided to turn the corner, changing directions, to create the cylinder shape? Yeah, needs some serious explaining for that.
Just want to thank you for sparing us the clickbait, as you point out, and still being interesting. The ‘sober analysis’ is greatly appreciated. That’s Cool.
Is it just me, or does this sound like a lot of scientists have made a lot of assumptions and then built on those assumptions and called it science. I'm getting "dark matter" vibes here, which in turn gives me "ether" vibes of yesteryear....
Thanks for watching all! We're honoured that Adam Riess who we mentioned in the video reached out today and I wanted to pass along what he wrote. Riess wanted to highlight that his team were careful to account for dust, noteably by working in near-infrared wavelengths, and believe their systematic error to be much smaller than the Hubble tension, as discussed in this paper arxiv.org/abs/2112.04510. For metallicity, they select 1st and 2nd distance ladder rung objects with similar metallicites to reduce its influence, and thus again believe this isn't the issue. So the tension is certainly not easy to understand in terms of systematics either. Thanks to Adam for reaching out and I hope his comments help shed some further light here. Ultimately, as I said in the video, we are all hoping to see multiple independent methods and analyses weigh in with refined upcoming data, either towards a genuine tension, or a convergence to a singular Hubble constant. What's exciting is that we should get clearer answers in the next year or so, but until let's all keep an open mind, even if like me we're secretly hoping for new physics ;-)
Ancient Greek crystal sphere model could correctly predict planetary motions and even eclipses. While a minority of ancient Greek thinkers correctly argued the earth rotated under the sun and that the stars were actually other distant suns their theory was not widely accepted. Part of the problem is they lacked the technology to validate these claims. if we move forward in time to Galileo and Copernicus, the Heliocentric model was accepted but their concept of univserse was still limited by the power of their early telescopes. By the late 19th century the miliky way galaxy was still widely considered the universe. Then comes Hubble and not only discovered other galaxies but discovered red shift that suggusted an expanding universe. Once again our conceptualisation of what constitutes the universe changed.
There is a pattern here. Our sense of our universe and its history is tightly coupled to the distance our technology can peer into it. Observation is critical to the scientific method. One can make assertions about specific aspects of the universe but there is a philosophical problem trying to use finite observations to make overly assertive claims about the entire universe. It may still turn out the universe is infinite in space and time.
This is speculation of course but I'm no longer a fan of the big bang theory. I could be wrong but I lean towards it never happened or there is something off with the theory to make it seem that was the moment of creation rather than just a moment in time in infinite time.. What made me first start questioning it was the discovery of dark energy and dark matter. The lack of adjusting the age of the universe downward (the age actually became older since then) suggested the formulas were wrong but because few are qualified to look at the complicated physics the immediate irregularity was brushed aside. There are other irregularities like the rather arbitrary tacking on of inflation. While inflation can make the math work no one really has an answer for what it actually allegedly is.
13.8 billion years old sounds like a lot of time but to randomly come up with the conditions for life along with randomly arriving at intelligent life in that timeframe seems highly unlikely. Even just considering the nature of numbers its seems absurdly low number. Why isn't it the year 13.8 trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion trillion? And so on. It's not proof of course but from a statistics standpoint it seems very implausible humans showed up this early. For all we know dark energy flips in a 100 billion years and we end up with an oscillating universe that avoids both big bang and the big rip.
Here is my prediction based on admittedly empirically flimsy a priori arguments. Either JWT or some next gen telescope that replaces it will find galaxies that are much older than predicted by Big Bang theory. The future wil mimick the past. As our ability to peer into the universe improves we will be forced to once again change our understanding of its size and age.
I don't claim this as a fact (could be wrong) and I don't have the math to prove it, It's just a gut guess but my bet is the steady state universe model will one day make a comeback but one that incorporates redshift, dark energy, dark matter,, gravity, CBT, QM and possibly other phenomena.
Fingers crossed Dr.Kipping:)
@smeeself5511 I'm open to criticism but you'll need to be more specific or just come across as a troll.
I am sure we have new physics coming up after QM and GR have been with us for a century now. We have the unexplained dark matter and dark energy something that could occupy cosmology for another hundred years. We are waiting for another Einstein to be born. Imagine if Einstein is born a hundred years later, we would NOT be able to correctly understand the nature of time for a century and still be using Lorentz transformation with funky material science explanation that keeps Newtonian time in place.
@@peterwan9076 Absolutely Peter,dark matter and dark energy are the new realms which science has to address with great precision and depth.Even artificial intelligence world is awaiting great innovation.Lovely to read your comment.
As a barely average student in science and a slightly below average student in math, I am cursed with a love and fascination of cosmology and physics. It's sources like this channel that give me a hope of even the slightest understanding of it all and keeps me coming back for more.
If you wanna get ahead and science, stay away from pure peer groups , understand with subjectivity and objectivity really means
🙋🏽♀❤
The Big Bang is a farce. The universe is not expanding
Watch Richard Feynman's QED and Character of Physical Law lectures. And read the books. Then read Quarks: The Stuff of Matter by Herald Fritsch.
I feel your pain.
Well, that’s my bedtime pushed out 25 mins!
Hope you finish it!
It's still 8pm here in Brazil, so I still have some time. 😬
Either way, sleep tight! 😊
Dang, just had the same thought when I saw a new CW video at 1:30 am, but there is no chance I won't watch it now
Actually, this is my lullabie….
Ave! Same))))
Despite having no scientific background and often not understanding every explanation, I love this channel. It heightens my sense of wonder about our universe. Looking forwards to the next video.
You have to watch many of the videos more than once to understand. This stuff is all cutting edge and counterintuitive. Physics & astronomy is the hardest stuff in the world. It's all outside our daily experience as humans. Our brains aren't even designed or configured to understand it. It's remarkable that any humans have made such progress in science. It's a total accident that evolution required our brains to develop to such a degree for survival purposes, that an understanding of physics and astronomy became an accidental byproduct. And this understanding was only because civilization and agriculture recently enabled many of us to think all day, instead of hunting and surviving all day, as was the case for 100 thousand years
I'm 60 and was born in the middle of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Astronomy is now in a Golden Age, and I couldn't be happier. When I was a kid, the Apollo Moonshot was the world-changing paradigm, then we had Skylab, followed by ISS and the Shuttle SLS. Now, we got all these scopes out there plus tons of satellites, and various probes to other worlds . . . Golden Age! 🧠👀
Shuttle then ISS. Im 65 and I get your point. I remember laying on our trampoline and staring at the moon during all Apollo missions. At 10 yrs old I couldn’t understand why I couldn’t see them, even when dad bought us a telescope from Sears.
For those who don’t know, Sears was the Amazon of our day.
Props to the editor for putting together these high-quality videos so frequently. Most people watch these videos for Mr Kipping's great explanations on these complex topics (and it can't be understated how great he does) but it wouldn't be the same without all the visuals.
The Editor (Jorge) really appreciated your comment!
@@CoolWorldsLab Zooper Dooper 108? If you want. Raven 16:02 two orange flavoured 107th gotta eat them with a gin now, lol. Do I have to look at the page I paused on in the 100 s2e1?
Cool as lol
H2O… 2 plus 8 dips in the sky on the art in mount weather map. I don’t want to do that all day, it is becoming familiar.
Even cool was correct b4 I looked… blue sky.
I wish you were my high-school teacher...I don't think I would have dropped out if you were. Your compassion for teaching science excites my childhood curiosity, and I just want to thank you.
I wish it was possible 2 clone Dr Kipping , and put him in EVERY skool ! There wouldn't B any bored students ... myself included 😭... tarra merry xmas
@@balwinderdosanjh1360 the clones should definitely start with English/grammar based on many of these comments.
I too have been fascinated with physics and the universe never know it all after 50 years I'm still learning...
@@balwinderdosanjh1360 might be possible in the future
He’d be the Walter white of astronomy
What an eloquently spoken commentary on issues in cosmology. I've been noticing a lot of sensationalized videos on TH-cam and it's good to have these more humble approaches to the topics. This is real science and unfortunately there's not many channels that portray these elements in this kind of way.
B
@@lloydlivsey6261 True
Yeah people need to be more humble & stop saying they know what gravity is when in fact they have no explanation for why spacetime is curved near mass & energy.
I love real science. The science we have now will tell us the universe is flat without the caveat that if the universe were 400x the size we estimate, it wouldn't need to be flat.
Amalgamation of the cosmos and God, so they never get confused about it again.
Dr. Kipping, some of us clicked on the video precisely because we knew that you would bring evidence, thoughtfulness, and nuance to the question. 😊 I always appreciate your videos and, more importantly, your commitment to science.
I saw this notification at work and got a text from my son about 5 minutes later. We're about to sit down and watch after supper and I can't thank you enough for you and your team giving him such a rush for learning.
One small correction: I didn't click on the video because of the title; I clicked on the video because it's a Cool Worlds video and those are >always< fascinating and informative, regardless of the topic/content. Thanks for this channel and all you bring!
One of the clearest and thorough explanation I've come across. Thank you for posting this.
Math rules!
Definitely beautiful and interesting to this non-scientific mind.
Also : th-cam.com/video/mty0srmLhTk/w-d-xo.html
I’m glad you thought it was clear! I must be thick as I found it difficult to keep up, but I find it all fascinating!
I cannot express how grateful I am that you're going into such detail on these subjects.
There's an awful lot of videos out there that barely scratch the surface and leave it at that.
Too many in fact.
Every crisis presents an opportunity to figure out something new ❤
Exactly. It just means we are in parking distance for something revolutionary.
You sound like my prime minister...
@@PazLeBon The "answer" is it's already been found a while ago, only the "cure" can NEVER be officially revealed and given to the public because the "Pharmaceutical Industry" would lose billions in profit from "treating" it.
This isn’t really a crisis tho
I'm not Cosmologist/Astrophysicist but I think the problem here is that we're approaching our understanding of the size/age of the universe from a bias vector. Humans are finite. We're born, we live, we age, we die. So are stars, planets, nebula, heck, even mountains and rocks have an age limit. Thus I think when we started exploring cosmology with hard science we did so under an unconscious assumption that the Universe is also finite.
That's where I think it all went wrong. Every "crisis of cosmology" that arises, and this isn't the first, all tends to point in the same direction: The universe is infinitely vast and infinitely old. It was never "created", will never end and has no size limit and the "big bang" was nothing more than a "local event" that occurred within a universe that already existed vs. creating the universe we're in.
This channel is brilliant. Your narration is amazing.... And to me, You are the David Attenborough of TH-cam. I always look forward to your new videos 🤘🏽
I beg to differ
The ultimate journey of our brother and sisters should be what when where and why
holy shit dude, i mean its good but like David is the GOAT nobody compares
Simp harder
I'll give you Richard, but not David.
He’s got the best voice out of almost all the other Utube Chanel’s
Cool worlds never tell you what you WANT to hear or EXPECTING to hear; but it’s thought provoking brilliant all together
No sensationalism. Just the facts. Thank you. I really appreciate the explanations of how we attain the information we do.
I feel so smart as I follow Dr. Kipping through the various topics. Thank you Dr. Kipping for all of the patient and thoughtful detail in your presentation.
His presentation is hypnotic and I like the fact that he is the exact opposite of a sensationalist. Imagine being able to make statistics a fascinating subject. What a gift to the world.
John von Neumann famously noted that with 4 parameters he could fit an elephant and with 5 he could waggle its trunk. The 6 parameters to model CMB is therefore hardly compelling especially when two of these, dark matter and dark energy, are Faerie Dust that can be assigned any distribution that astronomers desire, that can never be challenged because the gnomes will never be found in the particle garden.
The idea that there is a path dependency around which hypotheses are accepted/rejected is really fascinating to think about. And the implication that Cepheids aren’t actually very good standard candles, they’re just the first ones we figured out how to use, means we’ll have to re-write the astronomy textbooks.
That's another way of saying confirmation bias, which is a HUGE issue in cosmology, were only even asking these questions because of a 'tension', if erroneous methods give us the expected result they don't get questioned, worse we then build new expectations on thouse faulty conclusions which go on to influence the next observations.
@@kennethferland5579 Agreed - especially on a basis of high variability within a base measurement standard. Reasons being due to environment local compositions, color shift, or distortions along with the object being measured having possible variation in it's frequency or possible brightness itself. Could absolutely see how confirmation bias appearing since data tracks on a perceived line or pattern. High variability should always be a red flag & propose further data to ensure viability of the standard itself.
Well I mean that’s how the state of gravity is now. In relativity the classic ball and paper explanation works but at the quantum level it doesn’t which means gravitational forces are something deeper or we got something wrong with relativity but it’s close enough to still make that model work. The amazing thing in science is we’re always so focused on pushing forward that we often forget to recheck our work over time to make sure it still holds up to current models.
I think part of the issue is definitely our use of standard candles as our main method of measuring the universe.
Good carpenters use the same measuring tape for an entire project because there may be a discrepancy between measuring tapes. What I mean is we need a fixed, zero-variable method of calculating distance in the cosmos. Until we can do that, we will continue to be the baby trying to fit a cube into a circular hole.
It was a useful method for its time, but relying on individual interstellar objects for gathering so many important data is a big mistake.
Constructing buildings out of brick and mortar used to be state-of-the-art and was incredibly useful for its time, but we don't build skyscrapers out of it. We came up with better methods.
I really love your channel but it’s a double edge sword watching your content. You present things in such a great and enjoyable way makes it hard for me to enjoy other space related channels.
Facts
Better than Mr beast channel
@@haroldnecmann7040 Those guys that build those phoney water slides in the southeast asian jungle have a better channel than Mr. Beast...
this is simply the best
i have a b.s. in astronomy and it's always nice to find a channel that balances the technical and mathematical side of astronomy with the cool and exciting side that invokes curiosity in all of us
I click on Cool Worlds because it's information & science that is thoughtful & reliable. I look forward to the podcast!! Have a great New Year...
I clicked on this precisely because it was less click-baity and sensationalist.. and was appropriately rewarded. Thanks for being straight with us!
This is how science should be taught.
David, your videos are remarkable. Your narrative inspires me to listen carefully, keeping a google window open to search up unfamiliar terms. It feels as though you are teaching a master course in astronomy. Encourages me to expand my understanding in this area. Brilliant!
what's remarkable is the he can swallow this nonsense and think it's real
I love watching these TH-cam videos, on the cosmos. Most exceptionally well done.
In this particular instance. Our lovely host. Has some wonderful and expert, equalization and dynamic range processing. That makes his voice and his delivery. So wonderfully listenable. Above and beyond that of, even many other well produced, professional productions.
I'm an actual, successful, audio engineer and broadcast engineer. Who has made history. In the process of garnering, 4 major music awards nominations. For my audio engineering knowledge and expertise. And so I know from whence I speak. This audio is, to put it simply. Superb. And so wonderfully easy to listen to. So smooth and soothing. No rough edges. No harsh sounds. This person knows what they are doing. At the highest levels.
I rarely leave comments like this. For the other professionally produced videos. As their soundtracks are fine. While nothing also makes me sit up and take note. My ears and my hearing are, attune, to great audio. And the soundtrack just made me, perk right up. And go wow. This guy sounds great! And a rare complement for me. But I call it like I hear it. And well this just sounds fucking great!
This is a breath of fresh air. In a vacuum.
RemyRAD
Thank you for taking a minute to try and reinforce critical thinking and rational thought at the end of your video. The US needs it more than ever. Keep up the great work I love your videos even if some of them go over my head!
It’s called objectivity. In quantum physics objectivity is always right. Guaranteed after life. Subjectivity is always wrong. No after life.
@@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192 subjectively isn’t really always wrong, it just by definition doesn’t have a right or wrong answer outside of the individual observer. Which I guess is sort of what you’re getting at, but I wouldn’t call it “wrong”
In the text preamble above just below video title, should the section "...should be believe the sensationalism?" be replaced with "...should [we] believe the sensationalism?" Awesome presentation indeed!
This was the most understandable explanation of the distance ladder I've ever encountered. It's like everything clicked for me finally. Kudos for presenting it in a way that non-astronomers can understand the evolving processes and their refinement. It's amazing we got as much knowledge from Cepheids as we did, and it's exciting to have a new, more reliable standard candle going forward. Absolutely astounding work. Next, I'm hoping someone can bring some new insight into the "Axis of Evil," as it's one of my favorite mysteries. Is it a coincidence? Is it evidence of the observer phenomenon and retro causality as human eyes scan the skies from Earth? Can't wait to learn more.
Same! A simple rubber band with marks drawn on it with a sharpie. This did more for my understanding than any visualization yet. And the description and visualization of parallax as well! Thank you thank you thank you! 🫡✌🏼✨
There is a major problem with our view of the CMB. Observations have shown that the "shape" of the CMB matches the shape of "the trees in our backyard", ie the dust and gas clouds within our galaxy. In other words, imagine a first artist trying to determine the shape of clouds in the sky, and he makes a sketch ("Sketch 1") of them, but failed to take into account of the trees, their branches and their leaves between us and the clouds. The conclusion is that the clouds look like Sketch 1. Now imagine a second artist taking a sketch of the trees, their branches and the leaves ("Sketch 2"). When compared, it turns out that Sketch 2 looks very much like Sketch 1 especially when viewed from the same vantage point.
In other words, the wrong conclusions are made about the CMB.
This was really good. Thank you for the clear explanations and straightforward assessment.
I love how your videos only speak in terms of numbers and science, not the typical fallacious argument for different hot buttons about cosmology and science, i feel like i can actually reference your videos and papers bc they are truly researched and vetted for validation
My goodness, this guy explains it in a way that a totally d.u.m.b person regarding that matter like myself can actually understand it clearly. No BS, just clear and precise explanation, with such usefull illustrations. Thank you so much!
A totally "d.u.m.b" person wouldn't watch this type of content 🙈❣️
There are never any dumb people. There are only those who are willing to learn and those who aren't
I know I'm not dumb ,but where I get a bit lost are when certain scientific term are quoted that I have no idea what it means but I do get a little of what the overall talk is about
"No sensationalism, just the fact..." - this is why you're the greatest ❣
You’re the fucking best dude thank you for putting out the best videos that are always firmly based on the principles of science and healthy skepticism. I love how you refuse to speculate without explicitly stating that you’re speculating and are okay with being unsure or agnostic about the answers to these grand questions
Why swear?
@@mikehopkins4040 idk bc swearing is fucking lit dude. Really helps to drive home points of emphasis, especially when we only have text on screens to communicate with. And this channel deserves to be told emphatically how fucking good it is
I didn't click on the video because of the "Crisis in Cosmology" text - but because I searched for "David Kipping" after your lecture "Why we might be alone"
"... either one of these methods is wrong ..." -- hate to state the bleeding obvious, but maybe BOTH the methods are wrong
I tell you what, I love this guy. Especially the last part about clickbait etc. I still found this video fascinating! Never change cool worlds..
Thanks to you and the entire team, I’m in love with this channel. Although my profession has nothing to do with cosmology, I’ve always been fascinated with it and understanding what’s around us, and having this channel with its clear and digestible information in my arsenal of channels is amazing. Here’s to hoping for many more progresses in the years to come 🎉🎉
Agreed. There's no "Crisis". Just more dust than we imagined.
Thanks, this was the most comprehensive explanation of the crisis that I could actually understand!
Your outro on sensationalism was production flawlessness.
Another brilliant talk by Dr Kipping. I wish I'd have had such gifted science teachers while in school.
I really love this man's voice. Especially he never treats us as tho we can't understand what he's saying. More than this the increasing accuracy of the levied law, I love that the woman working on the Hubble constant is working on the solution. And making progress. This video is amazing. Iove the practical solution that falls short of a crisis. And how evidence supports it. I guess Pick 2 of 3.
Love your channel, not everyone can explain things in a way us normies can understand it , you do it well so thank you
Dr. Kipling I wanted to take the time to tell you how much I love your videos and respect your insightful analysis. You and Sabine are my favorite science TH-cam channels precisely because of your relaxed, non inflammatory insights.
That's not so bad. Just a boffin-squabble over very small numbers: the Universe may be slightly bigger or smaller than we thought it was. That stuff about dust and Cephids was news to me though, and the new measurements using big old stars sound very promising. Thanks for clearing this up for us, Professor. 🤓
this has to be my favorite channel about space, please keep on making this vids
You definitely gave me the answer I want to hear. A sober and straightforward analysis is what to me seems like the most appropriate and valuable approach, so thank you for that.
"All I can ever offer you on this channel is a sober analysis."
I wouldn't have it any other way. Thank you for respecting our intelligence.
I had seen a few TH-cam thumbnails on this topic, but didn't trust that they wouldn't be cluckbaity. When I saw you covering this topic I knew I would get a well considered, well thought out analysis. Keep up the great work!
What an incredibly well produced video. Loved the ease with which I could understand this thanks to your breakdown. Subbed for life.
I was hoping this title was addressing another crisis in cosmology which was addressed but not resolved in the 2022 Nobel Prize in physics. I was however excited by how clearly you addressed this crisis in the cosmological ladder crisis and it's possible solution.
Why the hell would study of cosmology make one a humanist?
Perhaps “enhance one’s existing humanist thoughts” would have been better. Cosmology is a tenant of humanist philosophy but being a cosmologist does not automatically make you a humanist.
Great comment my friend.
Dr. Brian May, a famous astrophysicist, wrote his PhD thesis on the very subject of dust and how it interferes with our observations of the universe. Realizing that the subject might be too difficult for most people to comprehend, he co-wrote a more generalized publication that predicted the eventual demise of the Cepheid Constant...
"Another One Bites the Dust." Yes. THAT Brian May.
I can only speak for myself but I don't click on coolworlds because of thumbnails. I click on coolworlds because I love science and space. Dr Kipping you're an amazing scientist and great at explaining to those of us who are not astrophysicist's. Thank you for sharing your universe with us! 🙏🏻
i swear David .. you are so darn good at taking complicated subjects and explaining them in a way that is so easy to understand. I love what your doing man. Thanks you soooooo much !
As always we can rely on Cool Worlds to put aside the hyperbole and click bait chasing trends of our current era, to enlighten us in a non sensationalist, and as a result, a far more interesting search to discover the true nature of the universe around us! Thank you
Really loved the "Sensationalism" section at the end. Thanks for keeping us honest! :)
The only thing that makes me really sad because of me dying someday, is that I will not be able to learn about all new discoveries in cosmology, physics. I wonder what our view on the world, Universe will be in hundred years. I'm not a scientist like you, professor, but astronomy, cosmology always captivated me and you are doing FANTASTIC job in making me (and millions of people around the world) to be able to learn new things.
Thank you so much.
Would it be more or less depressing to know that we may never be able to understand these things?
@@encyclopath probably! But that is entirely different field going to philosophy. I believe that there is eventually some sort of barrier beyond which we will not be able to understand things. For me it is why current collection of atoms and molecules that form my body is able to recognize it and think about it. I think this ultimate question is unanswereable.
The reason presented here is suspect if the Big Bang, black holes, and dark matter are erroneous. Time will tell eventually.
Yes, we mortals will eventually die ----- and will not be able to determine the ultimate in our existence of this COSMOS.
Nope! Clicked on this video because this is one of the best channels on TH-cam ⭐
Thank you so much for staying away from the sensationalism and instead presenting reasonable scientific discussions. I love this channel!
RED SHIFT: (copy and paste from my files):
Red Shift: Consider the following:
a. Current narrative: Space itself is expanding. (Even though science does not fully know yet what 'space' actually is nor how it could actually expand).
b. But consider: The net effect of solar winds, particles and energy pushing outward from galaxies, (even modern science claims 'em' has momentum), continuously, over a prolonged period of time, with other galaxies doing the same, with nothing to stop them from doing so, would tend to push galaxies away from each other and even potentially allow the cosmic web to form between galaxies.
And then, when we here in our galaxy, look at far away galaxies, with other galaxies in between, the net effect of all those galactic interactions would have galaxies furthest from ours move away faster the further those galaxies were from us, including us perceiving a red shift of energy.
c. Now, utilizing the scientific principal of Occam's razor, which way is more probably correct? What the current narrative is ('a' above), or 'b' utilizing known physics?
* Added note: Plus, 'if' my analysis is correct that our spiral shaped galaxy is collapsing in upon itself, then consider also:
d. When we look at solar systems between ours and the center of the galaxy, those solar systems would be getting pulled faster towards the center than ours, hence also seeing a red shift of energy.
e. When we look at solar systems between ours and the outer edge of the galaxy, our solar system would be getting pulled faster towards the center then them, hence also seeing a red shift of energy.
f. Only if we looked at solar systems adjacent to ours should we see a blue shift of energy (as the solar systems became closer together as they moved towards the center of the galaxy). I also propose looking for blue shifts of energy between our solar system and adjacent solar systems to confirm or deny this current belief.
g. But if true, would also add to our observation of seeing a red shift of energy in this universe as our spiral shaped galaxy collapses in upon itself.
Of which, not only would species from this Earth have to get off of this Earth before the Sun becomes a red giant one day and wipes out all life on this Earth if not even the entire Earth itself, but species from this Earth would also have to successfully get out of this collapsing spiral shaped galaxy, otherwise, most probably death awaits us all and this Earth and all on it are all just a waste of space time in this universe. All life from this Earth would eventually die and go extinct. Currently, no exceptions.
h. QUESTION: Do basically all galaxies eventually collapse in upon themselves?
(Which would add to the perceived red shift between galaxies as they all basically shrink in size).
Modern science currently states that 'gravity' is matter bending the fabric of spacetime. There is a lot of matter in a galaxy and hence would make a huge dent in spacetime. How could galaxies not collapse in upon themselves if space and time were bent to make it so?
Of which also, the progression of galaxies?:
1. How exactly do galaxies form? (The current narrative is that matter, via gravity, attracts other matter. The electric universe model also includes universal plasma currents.)
2. How exactly do galaxies flatten out if gravity is acting on the whole galaxy? (Other forces must also be at work besides gravity for a galaxy to flatten out? Electrical and/or magnetic forces?)
3. How exactly do galaxies become spiral shaped? (At least one way would be orbital velocity of matter with at least gravity acting upon that matter, would cause a spiral shaped effect. The electric universe model also includes energy input into the galaxy, which spiral towards the galactic center, which then gets thrust out from the center, at about 90 degrees from the input. Additionally, with the conservation of energy, as energy moves into the vertical plane from the center of the horizontal plane, energy from the horisontal plane moves to the center of the horizontal plane to replace the energy that moved into the vertical plane. There is also the conservation of angular momentum. As more matter moves towards the center of the galaxy, that portion of the galaxy would speed up relative to the matter towards the outer portions of the galaxy.)
4. The natural progression of a galaxy would be to become smaller and smaller.
5. Of which, does all life throughout the entire universe (if other life even exists in the universe besides what is on this Earth, which is most probably true) eventually die and go extinct and the entire universe and all in it are ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things and the entire universe and all in it are ultimately just a waste of spacetime in existence?
And even 'if' the current narrative of space itself is expanding, and the entire universe would eventually end in a 'big freeze', wouldn't the end of life itself in this entire universe still occur?
It's so disappointing that James Webb didn't shoot the death rays at Proxima B's civilisation. I was hoping for some galactic war action. Jokes aside, it's honestly amazing new discoveries and breakthroughs like this are letting us understand our universe better, thanks for explaining this in simple terms for us common folk.
The singular big bang is a fairy tale for various reasons. The universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning.
Very good video as I've come to expect. I'd rather have sober reasonable analysis that admits there's more to learn than some clickbaity nonsense that doesn't even attempt to explain what is known so far.
The Best Presentation of this material I have seen, and I have looked at a lot of them.
The idea of the universe having a begining is a human contruct. It's like teaching a dog mathematics. It can't be done in time scales we think in.. The human brain is just wired to think of things through the lens of a begining and end.. There is no begining or end. The universe has always been here. Evolving on a globe means if you walk in one direction you always end up where you started (sortof) but you get the point it's built into our consciousness to think of things in a certain way..
Just a word to your closing comments: I am fine with catchy and somewhat "clickbait" titles. As long as I get hard sience as content. In the vast sea of stuff on youtube alone, you have to make some bold statements to catch the eye of the person looking at his/her youtube recommendation list.
By the way: this is how I got to your channel yesterday. But looking at your *content* made me a subscriber. And that never happens on titles alone. And while we are at it: Thanks for the incredible content.
No. I clicked the video because I am a subscriber, and wanted to hear what you had to say. I have nothing to really say on the crisis itself, as it doesn't interest me on any personal level. I just hear what people say, then I let it sort itself out in the deeper recesses of my mind while I continue to seek more knowledge to compile. A never ending cycle. My conclusion thus far.. the universe is weird.
No, I didn't click on this video because of the title. I'll click on any video which is from this channel. That's how good this channel is.
So far, this is the best video giving me an intuition of the distance calculations and the possible causes of the crisis in cosmology
Good lad, excellent video. Happy holidays and thanks for doing all this, its appreciated.
How brilliant human minds are for coming up with these ideas.
One of a kind creator on TH-cam, gotta keep him safe !
This is easily one of my favorite channels on astronomy and associated topics on TH-cam and beyond! The subject matter is presented incredibly well by an actual person who knows what they are talking about! Even though some of the information can be overwhelmingly complex to understand, it is explained in a way that anyone can understand and appreciate!
Thanks for your extraordinary work and dedication to sharing your knowledge and insights with the world, therefore making the human race more intellectually evolved!
Professor, as always, your content is informing, clear, non-sensational, and accessible for your average person - how lucky are we to have such regular access to great scientists as yourself instead of clickbait nonsense.
I find your comment, “…one that has inspired transformations from nihilism to humanism,” omitting theism, to be shallow and biased; Given that the study of cosmology has either contributed to, or directly led to the conversion of many people from humanism to theism.
‘Cosmological wonder’ has guided many intelligent people from the study of natural science, through philosophy to Theology.
And this is not to mention the fact that many of the greatest discoveries in the history of cosmology were made by Catholic scientist-monks or otherwise deeply religious people.
I hope I am mistaken, but that comment stuck out to me as an indicator of ideological bias based on contemporary trends within the scientific community.
Predispositions don't count...
But the exaggeration approach - and honesty does (thanks for your honesty because I really liked clicking on this video)!
Personally, I think this is one of the very best channels on You tube, and I agree with Sabine Hossenfelder, I prefer my You tube subs to be PhD's or experts in the field they are talking about. Sorry to appear to be snob but I am easily satisfied by the best of everything and I count Cool Worlds as one of those things. Warm Regards.
Wow, what an awesome video. So much great stuff in it, it's a bit hard to process all that info and perspective but that's why it's worth a few times watching. Thank you so much.
Great video, well explained and thought provoking! Thanks so much for producing this!
I found this video very clearly explaining the so called "crisis in cosmology". As I'm not a native English speaker, I also follow the automatically generated English text while listening. The mistakes are sometimes hilarious. Cepheids denoted as "selfies", ".. well inside the galaxy" becomes "warm inside the galaxy". Thanks for the nice explanation though!
"Warm inside the galaxy"
Heheh reminds me of my gf
Still best channel on TH-cam. You give meaning to life for so many, thank you, Dr. Kipping!
I found out that there is one simple reason why it cant be “created” by using quantum math:
-The magnitude of the Universe is zero. It does not exists. It never existed before, it does not exist now and it wont going to exist ever.
So, it is not possible to create there cause nothing is never created.
-The magnitude of the Universe is infinite. It existence is absolute. It exists since forever, it allways existed and always will.
So, it is not possible to create there cause everything is allready created.
If you notice more than one statement there, they are equal in value like etc:
1 + 1 = 2. The reason why 1 + 1 equals 2 is the same reason why it cant be created.
Dr Kipping, of all the people I can think of that I would love to sit down with by a fire on a winters night with a good bottle of wine and time to talk ( or an afternoon in a British country pub) its you. A fan since your channel started, 62 yo retired combat pilot. Thank you for the message you deliver.
Sober, well explained without sensationalism, detailed and enjoyable to listen to - even for a novice like myself. Cannot thank you enough for explaining this term and why I have heard it repeated constantly. Beyond happy that I clicked on this. Thank you.
I love when there's a new Cool Worlds video! Because your speech tune is amazingly calm and optimistic! It's so easy to learn a lot from you (:
Actually you gave me the answer I wanted to hear: an honest evaluation of the current data by an expert in the field.
I clicked on this video, not for the tagline, instead, i clicked because it came from the cool worlds lab. Keep up the great work!
Best voice in popular science on TH-cam 📺
The quality of these videos is phenomenal. We are so lucky a scientist of Kipling's calibre has taken the time to reach out and teach us.
I regularly watch all of your videos, Professor Kipping. Don't stop!
The current model of what our universe looks like, that cylinder shape, makes absolutely no sense to me. I feel like it is a mistake to assume our universe is expanding in only one direction. And it puzzles me to no end how anyone could look at that and say "Yep, that makes sense." And the very bottom of it is the worst of it. Are you telling me that, in the beginning, the matter of the universe as it is forming, curved outward from the origin, and then decided to turn the corner, changing directions, to create the cylinder shape? Yeah, needs some serious explaining for that.
Thanks for binging the facts without any clickbaits. I love your narration and calm explanation. Looking forward to learn more from you.
Just want to thank you for sparing us the clickbait, as you point out, and still being interesting. The ‘sober analysis’ is greatly appreciated. That’s Cool.
Is it just me, or does this sound like a lot of scientists have made a lot of assumptions and then built on those assumptions and called it science. I'm getting "dark matter" vibes here, which in turn gives me "ether" vibes of yesteryear....